this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
176 points (96.8% liked)

Not The Onion

12295 readers
2075 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/21328111

The machines are distributed by the Texas-based American Rounds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago (5 children)

This is so dumb it beggars belief. Yes, prohibited people are not allowed to buy ammo. However, anyone can go anywhere and buy ammo with nothing more than an ID, and that's only an age check. Do these senators think Walmart is running a background check on me when I pick up a box of 12-gauge?!

Saw an amusing video showcasing the ammo cops had confiscated from gangbangers. These guys often had 3-4 different types of ammo in the same magazine. If they can't afford to visit Academy for a box of 20, they sure can't afford vending machine prices.

Wrong hill to fight on you idiots.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Well.

Walmart kinda does do a background check on you, yes. They have an entire biometric dossier, too.

They don’t care if you’re buying ammo illegally, though. But they are running background checks on everyone coming into their stores. Have been for a while.

[–] ieatpillowtags@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Wait what? Background checks on everyone that goes in a Walmart?? That’s an insanely large number of people.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

yup.

So. Their security cameras, that are literally everywhere in the store? they're tied into all sorts of biometrics. Facial recognition, gate recognition.

They also get your name, address, etc, if you ever use a credit or debit card, and match it to that. Their system goes and dives and runs everything public about you, as well as they record everything you do, everything you buy, and build that into a dossier. Their loss prevention staff, get alerts about anyone they think needs to be watched.

pretty much all of the big box stores and other large retail chains are using these kinds of systems. hell, Some places have started using "smart" cameras to track how long you stare at the gossip rags while waiting to check out, or the candy as you walk by the candy aisle.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 months ago

None of this would be very surprising to me but you got a source on this?

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This all sounds like bullshit to me without sources.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

ACLU on biometrics

Forbes on IoT devices

ArsTech on facial rec. retailers love to blame everything they fucking can on shoplifters. it's a great excuse.

Walmart bragging about it in their online space. Sure, that's online. But Walmart has had the ability to track everything you do in the store for literal decades, and has actively developed AI facial recog (and lets be honest, other related biometrics). If you think the online data is valuable... then you gotta wonder about the physical end of it to.

And it's incredibly valuable as IoT tags start pushing you advertisements, and all those smart shelves they're installing are tracking where you look as they flash their cheery little adverts that are crafted with the advice and input of a small army of neuroscientistis. oh. that sounds ridiculous bullshit doesn't it? Actually, the field is now it's own field called 'neuromarketing'. the IoT shelves, the security systems tracking customers providing near-real-time feedback on those things all require a massive database.

What's really disgusting is that they will cheerfully lie to you and tell you its to make your experience better.. (if that's even true at all, it's because they want the spare change they didn't get.)

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 2 points 2 months ago

Fuck yes. Thank you.

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

You never paid attention to the screens above the line for the self checkouts? You can see the system isolating faces and gait in real-time.

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Could I bother you for some sauce?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

ACLU

We asked some of America’s biggest retailers and, with a few exceptions, they refused to tell us.

Naturally. Like Bruno, you don't generally talk about your security arrangements. Most companies that install security cameras for commercial uses have their own AI system- or a relationship with a company that provides it. It can actually be extremely useful and not at all as awful as you imagine. Usually, it's actually quite worse. one might even say nefarious.

in any case...

We do know that most major retailers have video cameras in their stores. We know that at least one face recognition vendor is pushing the use of the technology for identifying shoplifters, and claims to have several Fortune 500 retailers among its clients. We know the technology’s use is rapidly growing in the UK. We know the New York Times reported recently that the use of face recognition is being “explored” at Madison Square Garden. We know that Walmart tested the technology in its stores for several months in 2015. And now we know that at least one major American retailer, Lowe’s hardware, has begun using the technology without informing visitors to its stores.

and it goes on.

But I think it’s fair to say that most customers do not think that they are being subject to a perpetual lineup, scrutinized by face recognition technology to see if they resemble anyone that a company security service has decided to put on a watch list. They do not expect that their faces are being captured, retained, connected to their real-world identity (for example when they use a credit card at checkout), and combined with information about their income, education, demographics, and other data. They do not expect that their every footstep, hand motion, and gaze will be analyzed by computers and filed away to give insight into their shopping habits, patterns, and preferences, and shared among different companies, data brokers, and advertisers. They do not expect that they are subject to the risk of being misidentified as someone in a database of suspected criminals, fugitives, terrorists, or whatever other blacklists stores may be using or begin using in the future. They don’t expect that all these intimate details about their behavior will become accessible to government agencies through legal demands or voluntary sharing.

And if those things are happening, I think most customers would want to know about it.

if you scroll there's a very clear message of "we don't know, they're not saying". they asked 20 of the top retailers... most refused to answer. of the remainder that did answer... only one said 'no'.

Remember, we don't talk about Bruno. but maybe we should.

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I might be misreading this, but it seems like the ACLU is saying it's possible, but they don't have any yard evidence.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Of course there’s no hard evidence.

You really think the people that have first hand knowledge are allowed to tell them? You think that Walmart or anyone else is going to admit to knowing your dick size?* (Or your partner’s as the case may be?)

All the people that responded back, only two gave a hard answer, and I’d be willing to bet that the one that said “no” probably weaseled it with something like “we do not do facial recognition for security reasons” or whatever if they’re doing it for “marketing” or “improving shopper experience” or whatever.

And what they’re doing isn’t illegal (and they’ve lobbied governments across the world to ensure that,) so they simply don’t have to answer.

Of course there’s no hard evidence. But there’s plenty of soft evidence. Like how the fuck do you think they’re going to pop personalized adds in store if they don’t know who you are and what you’re doing?

“But they don’t know my dicksize! You’re just being alarmist!”…. You ever buy condoms?

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You confidently.stated things as fact without hard evidence.

Noted.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"hard" evidence.

you're sealioning. I've already dropped plenty of good evidence. You're welcome to drop any evidence you have, at all, that they're not. including the ACLU, and several other sources.

I'll wait.

You're wrong if you think you're entire life isn't already in Walmart's database, though. Or any other major retailer. or minor retailer. Or the data brokers that are buying and selling from everybody. Welcome to 2024.

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call conjecture "good evidence" under any circumstances.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You sound a bit salty.

Allow me to explain something.

I cannot give you what you want. But I do have first hand experience with these systems. I don’t expect you to trust me, but they are doing this. They’d have to be monumentally stupid not to. The data is that valuable.

But you should probably go reread the alcu article, specifically the part where Walmart settled out of court because they were (illegally,) using clear view’s service.

Do you seriously think that they’re just gonna admit being monumentally creepy? Nope. But everyone is.

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

How, exactly, do you think the personalized ads wind up on your phone app?

Serious question, if you have a Walmart app or whatever for one store or another?

Or how any personalized ads works?

For physical locations using things like smart shelves, the IoT sensor sees you, looks you up, gives you a relevant advertisement and hopes you buy something.

None of that works without them tracking the ever living fuck out of you.

You don’t want to trust me, that’s fine. That’s your choice. But the next time you’re in a Walmart or somewhere walking by the soda aisles and they flash you an add for your favorite chips to go with that….

… ask how they know what your favorite chips are.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Different calibers or different tips?

People have pet theories about the best order of rounds for self defence and stuff.

I bet you're right it's just whatever they found but different calibers would surprise me

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

Yeah, putting different rounds in a magazine isn't that weird. It's particularly useful if you are using tracers, to notify you when the end of the magazine is coming up for example, and to only have a tracer every few rounds. Even without that, there are reasons someone might have for mixing rounds in a magazine. Obviously, like you said, same caliber is how this is done. If it's alternating calibers then that's not great.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Do these senators think Walmart is running a background check on me when I pick up a box of 12-gauge?!

They’re playing dumb because they want to start doing background checks on ammo purchases.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Depends on the state. The senators in question are both from Massachusetts, where you are required to have a license to purchase a firearm, and, presumably, ammunition as well. I know that Illinois requires a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) for any gun or ammunition purchase.

I don't think I'd even get carded in my state; I'm clearly old enough.

[–] Ramzuul@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

In NY, they have a background check for ammo now